In a fresh blow to NASA's post-shuttle aspirations, key US lawmakers voted Thursday to kill off funding for the successor to the vastly successful space-gazing Hubble telescope.

The US House of Representatives Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, and Science approved by voice vote a yearly spending bill that includes no money for the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST).

It's not a done deal yet, but sheesh.

Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

Congress, why not be honest and just shut down NASA altogether? Between this and Constellation, it's practically neutered anyway. I can't wait till they pull funding for New Horizons before it even reaches 134340 Pluto. (I jest but at this rate I wouldn't be surprised.)

I don't understand the disdain for space science and exploration. What NASA does with their piddly $17 billion annually (0.5% of federal spending) gets more bang for the buck than most of our government spending gets.

Congress, why not be honest and just shut down NASA altogether? Between this and Constellation, it's practically neutered anyway. I can't wait till they pull funding for New Horizons before it even reaches 134340 Pluto. (I jest but at this rate I wouldn't be surprised.)

I don't understand the disdain for space science and exploration. What NASA does with their piddly $17 billion annually (0.5% of federal spending) gets more bang for the buck than most of our government spending gets.

Congress, why not be honest and just shut down NASA altogether? Between this and Constellation, it's practically neutered anyway. I can't wait till they pull funding for New Horizons before it even reaches 134340 Pluto. (I jest but at this rate I wouldn't be surprised.)

I don't understand the disdain for space science and exploration. What NASA does with their piddly $17 billion annually (0.5% of federal spending) gets more bang for the buck than most of our government spending gets.

You do realize that the US Legislature with a straight face voted to cut a petty $500,000,000 from the annual budget (that is HALF of its budget by the way )for WIC (Women, Infants, and Children) federal food assistance program right? So in the scheme of things, and in the context of good Christian charity and concern for the poor, the very thing which the Apostles taught us is central to Christianity, isn't it best to scarp a multi-billion dollar a year program when we apparently don't even have enough funding to feed the poor and unfortunate? It costs $1,000,000,000 a launch for the space shuttle, which is approxamitaley the entire annual budget of WIC, so with each launch we waste the money that could go to feed hundreds of thousands of people who are at the bottom of income and literally live on this assistance.

If the US govt is claiming that it doesn't have enough $$$ to pay for a food assistance program that is roughly 3% of NASA annual budget, then perhaps we need to cut NASA and get our priorities in line with reality.

I enjoy Hubbles images, and I love the science it has discovered in regards to cosmic evolution and other wonders, however I don't feel it is right to pay for it on the backs of the poor women, infants, and children of America whose future may be squandered for a bunch of intellectual masturbation

stay blessed,habte selassie

« Last Edit: July 08, 2011, 03:55:07 PM by HabteSelassie »

Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10

I would rather they cut some of the military budget than cut NASA any further. Space technology does have some benefits (anyone here use cell phones?) whereas bombing [insert sandbox here] does very little. Not to mention, we have enough nuclear weapons to destroy the world a few times over...no nation-state is going to mess with us. Cut the military down to several regimental sized integrated expeditionary forces and some tactical air power plus the navy and we should be set.

As for WICs and other welfare programs, I'd just as soon we put more money into the economy and job creation so that these people would be able to provide for themselves. I wholeheartedly support the idea of a safety net, but when people use the net as a hammock we have a problem. But this is a topic for another time. The bottom line it that NASA is producing new technologies which could spawn new jobs. There is a benefit.

Why isn't the church taking care of women, infants, and children? Surely the 80% of Americans who are Christians can come up with $500 million? That's what Christ commanded us to do. If the Christians in America were doing what our God told us to do, we would not need the government to legislate charity (which is not charity, incidentally, because it is taken by force and not given freely).

We individuals, however, are not capable of shooting people into deep space. Such bold steps taken by governments is why any of us are living in the Americas at all. Besides the natural outgrowths of exploration (colonization, discovery of resources, etc) there are countless advancements to everyday life brought to us by space exploration. Here is just a small list of modern everyday necessities (even for women, infants, and children) that were created by or spun off from the needs of space science:

Necessity is the mother of invention. Take away the necessity, and you take away the advancements. Without space exploration, many of these things probably would not have been invented. Certainly not at the rate at which they were. Space exploration is the catalyst behind the invention of countless new technologies that we can no longer live without.

Launching the Shuttle is indeed expensive. Though it is less than half of the cost you cited, at about $450 million. I think the Shuttle program was a money pit for the most part. That is why we were moving to the cheaper and flexible Constellation program with the Ares + Orion launch system. Until the president and Congress killed it, that is.

Why isn't the church taking care of women, infants, and children? Surely the 80% of Americans who are Christians can come up with $500 million? That's what Christ commanded us to do. If the Christians in America were doing what our God told us to do, we would not need the government to legislate charity (which is not charity, incidentally, because it is taken by force and not given freely).

Agreed completely, and the RC is the largest single source of charity in both the US and the world, but at this rate its simply not enough. Unfortunately the American ethos is not very kind to charity at home, and so we have to rely on the government to force us to part with our money through taxes, because if the people in their churches are not going to cover the need, we surely can't have children starving in the streets, and for literally millions of people that is a potential. Further, we ourselves here as Orthodox Christians, when we pay our taxes to Caesar as our Lord told us, should at the least have high expectations that Caesar help out with the poor and unfortunate if the people ourselves are not seeming to step up enough to fulfill all of the need. One way or the other, we can't have people suffering from hunger, and we need to abandon political ideology which blinds our Christian hearts from the reality which our Lord and Savior commands from us when He told us to feed the hungry. Jesus Christ didn't mention anything about politics or ideology in that regard.

I would rather they cut some of the military budget than cut NASA any further. Space technology does have some benefits (anyone here use cell phones?) whereas bombing [insert sandbox here] does very little. Not to mention, we have enough nuclear weapons to destroy the world a few times over...no nation-state is going to mess with us. Cut the military down to several regimental sized integrated expeditionary forces and some tactical air power plus the navy and we should be set.

As for WICs and other welfare programs, I'd just as soon we put more money into the economy and job creation so that these people would be able to provide for themselves. I wholeheartedly support the idea of a safety net, but when people use the net as a hammock we have a problem. But this is a topic for another time. The bottom line it that NASA is producing new technologies which could spawn new jobs. There is a benefit.

WIC is not a hammock, it is a crucial program which benefits children ages 0-5 and keeps them from suffering malnutrition, you'd be surprised how poor people in a rich country can actually be It doesn't provide cash of any kind, not even food stamps, it is a voucher program where people receive voucher coupons to trade for specific food staples like bread, milk, meats, and cereals. Further, the stores that sell WIC only sell WIC, and they tend to be profitable since the government pays top prices whereas in the market they'd have to have more sales to compete, so not only does this program benefit the poor as a crucial safety net, but it also directly benefits the mom and pop food stores who otherwise couldn't possibly compete with Walmart Supercenters..

and would the poor actually get any of those NASA jobs? Doubtful..

I agree with sentiments about cutting military spending over NASA, however I am a realist, and well in the good ol U S of A that is not likely. That is all for the politics, I really wanted to keep this religious, hence why I brought up the feeding of the poor and the cutting of WIC just to put this NASA thing into perspective. Obviously, politics aside, there are several ways in which we can afford everything, military, NASA, and WIC, but that is not really an appropriate debate for this thread.

I like NASA, I like hubble, but again, if it comes at the expense of feeding the poor, mothball that whole program.

stay blessed,habte selassie

« Last Edit: July 08, 2011, 08:47:36 PM by HabteSelassie »

Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10

Congress, why not be honest and just shut down NASA altogether? Between this and Constellation, it's practically neutered anyway. I can't wait till they pull funding for New Horizons before it even reaches 134340 Pluto. (I jest but at this rate I wouldn't be surprised.)

I don't understand the disdain for space science and exploration. What NASA does with their piddly $17 billion annually (0.5% of federal spending) gets more bang for the buck than most of our government spending gets.

Nasa is one of the few government run organizations that work. There are countless examples of technology developed by NASA that have become part of our everyday lives. What is more (and I realize that some might say that I am crazy for saying this) but domination in space is still a matter of national security and always will be

Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.

I don't understand the disdain for space science and exploration. What NASA does with their piddly $17 billion annually (0.5% of federal spending) gets more bang for the buck than most of our government spending gets.

Because that's money that could go to more tax cuts and corporation subsidies. Who needs this science junk

Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

If NASA really does generate $7 for every $1 spent on it, why not spin it off into a private entity?

Perhaps because it will not then be easily used as a Muslim outreach agency while at the same time being involved in dubious research in support of 'climate change'?

Frankly, as far as Hubble's successor goes, if it was to be that one placing the telescope at L4 or L5 La Grange Points of solar orbit, then canceling it is an inspired decision of great wisdom. THAT is a plan for disaster, especially given NASA's tendency for error - sometimes amateurishly so. Those of us who know the optics of telescopes know the current HST is a travesty and despite all the hype about it's better-than-expected performance it never achieved its potential (by several magnitudes in sensitivity) with its original spherical aberration defect.Placing its replacement in an orbit where we will NEVER be able to directly service it (by humans), is lunacy.

Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides